It seemed to me there was a real disagreement at the end of the
joint-committee call today. Here's a test case. If I understood
correctly, Pat (and I) will vote for (b) and Richard will vote for
(a).
The knowledge base contains the statements: "Pat's car is blue, and
there is something colored red." Somewhat more formally:
RDF(PatsCar, color, blue).
exists x (RDF(x, color, red)).
or in N-Triples (ignorng URI syntax)
<patsCar> <color> <blue>.
_:a <color> <red>.
And then we have the query: "is there anything with any color?", or
RDF(?x, color, ?y).
Do we get back
(a) 1 triple
<patsCar> <color> <blue>.
or (b) 2 triples
<patsCar> <color> <blue>.
_:b <color> <red>.
(where I've changed the _:a to _:b just to emphasise that it is an
arbitrary term, and its scope does not carry over from the knowledge
base to the response).
or (c) 2 triples with genid (skolem constant)
<patsCar> <color> <blue>.
<reasonerCreatedSymbol79878687> <color> <red>.
If everyone actually is happy with (b), then we were in fact in
violent agreement. If not, then there's a real issue here.
-- sandro http://www.w3.org/People/Sandro/